Philippine labor coalition presses government to respond in Metro Manila wage case

Traders Union
All News
Regulators
Metro Manila wage case

Highlights

Nagkaisa Labor Coalition urges the Labor secretary and OSG to file their comment by Oct. 26 in the Supreme Court wage dispute over NCR-27.
Employers argue Wage Order NCR-28's P60 daily wage increase from Sept. 26 renders the NCR-27 case moot, while workers seek P3.564 billion in retroactive claims.
The Supreme Court must address legal arguments on whether trial courts can block wage orders and rule on wage differential and distortion claims totaling P6.318 billion.

Supreme Court filing deadline shapes wage dispute

As reported by BusinessWorld Online, the Nagkaisa Labor Coalition on Sunday calls on the Labor secretary and the Office of the Solicitor General to promptly file their comment in the petition challenging court orders that stopped the implementation of Wage Order NCR-27.

Nagkaisa Chairman Jose Sonny G. Matula, counsel for the petitioners, says employers have already filed their comment and workers have submitted their reply. He says the case concerns wages needed for food, transportation, rent, utilities, loans and other family necessities.

The petition was filed on Aug. 11 by Party-list Rep. Elijah R. San Fernando and labor groups including the Federation of Free Workers, the National Federation of Labor and Sentro. It challenges orders issued by two Pasig City trial courts and a Navotas City court involving Wage Order NCR-27, which provides a P60 daily wage increase effective July 25 and another P25 on Jan. 20, 2027, for a total P85 increase.

Court filings show a status quo ante order, a temporary restraining order and a writ of preliminary injunction keep the wage order from taking effect. In a Sept. 22 motion, the OSG, representing the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board for the National Capital Region and the National Wages and Productivity Commission, seeks 30 more days until Oct. 26 to file its comment, saying it needs time to coordinate with its clients because of related cases before trial courts and the Court of Appeals.

Employers' mootness claim meets workers' loss estimates

In a consolidated comment dated Sept. 29, Readycon Trading and Construction Corp., R-II Builders, Inc. and the Alliance of Philippine Fishing Federations, Inc. ask the Supreme Court to dismiss the petition, arguing that Wage Order NCR-28 makes the case moot. Issued on Sept. 7, NCR-28 grants a single P60 daily wage increase effective Sept. 26, which the employers say delivers the relief sought by the petition.

The employers also argue that the petitioners were not parties to the trial court cases, bypassed the hierarchy of courts and failed to show grave abuse of discretion by the lower courts. They add that Article 126 of the Labor Code bars injunctions against proceedings before wage boards, not the enforcement of an issued wage order.

In their Oct. 12 reply, the petitioners say NCR-28 does not address claims covering July 25 to Sept. 25 or the remaining P25 tranche under NCR-27. They estimate a potential wage differential of P3,240 per worker, or P3.564 billion for 1.1 million minimum wage earners, based on 54 compensable working days, and a further P2.754 billion in possible wage distortion adjustments for 1.7 million workers. The combined P6.318 billion estimate is described in the filing as indicative rather than an adjudicated sum.

The dispute now turns on both timing and legal scope, because the Supreme Court still has to act on the petitioners' motion for leave to file their reply and on the OSG's request for more time. The case also raises a broader question for the labor sector, whether trial courts may block wage orders issued under Republic Act No. 6727, or the Wage Rationalization Act.

In our earlier article, we examined the Philippines’ planned reforms to peso-denominated government bond pricing and the push for inclusion in J.P. Morgan’s Government Bond Index-Emerging Markets, alongside what these steps could mean for liquidity and foreign participation. We also noted that market modernization alone does not guarantee stronger investment and job creation, arguing that outcomes still hinge on broader fundamentals such as fiscal credibility, deeper local capital markets, and wider structural reforms that improve productivity and the business environment.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.